Paper · 2002 · HortScience

Partial Flower Thinning Increases Shoot Growth, Fruit Size, and Subsequent Flower Formation of Peach

Stephen C. Myers; Amy T. Savelle; D. Stuart Tustin; et al.

11
claims
22
verbatim quotes
24
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Partial thinning of peach ( Prunus persica L. Batsch) during bloom to 50% of the necessary level by hand, and followed by adjustment hand thinning at 42 days after full bloom (DAFB) was compared to a similar degree of thinning accomplished entirely at 42 DAFB by hand. Partial flower thinning altered the distribution of fruit by diameter, increasing the percentage of large diameter (≥62.0 mm) fruit harvested compared to unthinned trees or trees thinned entirely at 42 DAFB. Although shoot number per limb was not altered by thinning time, the distribution of shoots by length was affected, increasing the percentage of long shoots (≥20.0 cm). Compared to unthinned trees and trees thinned at 42 DAFB, partial flower thinning increased the subsequent development of flower buds per shoot and the number of flower buds per node. Number of flower buds on the proximal five nodes of shoots 15.0-30.0 cm in length was increased, although not on shoots 5.0-7.0 cm in length. Additional trials established that airblast spray application of AMADS was effective in achieving a similar level of thinning as that accomplished by partial flower thinning by hand in previous experiments. The degree of flower removal exhibited a linear response to chemical concentration. Fruit diameter on chemically flower-thinned trees was greater at adjustment thinning time, when compared to trees thinned by hand at 42 DAFB only. Distribution of fruit at harvest indicated a larger percentage of fruit >65.0 mm in trees which received partial flower thinning in comparison to trees thinned at 42 DAFB only. As a result, overall crop value was increased, based on the commercial processing peach price structure at the time of harvest. Chemical name used: 1-aminomethanamide dihydrogen tetraoxosulfate (AMADS)

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Partial flower thinning increased the share of large fruit relative to unthinned and later thinned trees.

Treatment
Partial flower thinninge0
Outcome
percentage of large diameter (≥62.0 mm) fruite0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
unthinned trees or trees thinned entirely at 42 DAFBe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Partial flower thinning altered the distribution of fruit by diameter, increasing the percentage of large diameter (≥62.0 mm) fruit harvested compared to unthinned trees or trees thinned entirely at 42 DAFB”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 269–475 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Thinning time did not alter shoot number per limb.

Treatment
thinning timee0
Outcome
shoot number per limbe0
Direction
not alterede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“shoot number per limb was not altered by thinning time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 486–540 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Partial thinning increased the share of long shoots.

Treatment
Partial Flower Thinningt0
Outcome
percentage of long shoots (≥20.0 cm)e0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the distribution of shoots by length was affected, increasing the percentage of long shoots (≥20.0 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 542–644 · show in text ↑
t0

“Partial Flower Thinning Increases Shoot Growth, Fruit Size, and Subsequent Flower Formation of Peach”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Partial thinning raised flower buds per shoot.

Treatment
partial flower thinninge0
Outcome
flower buds per shoote0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
unthinned trees and trees thinned at 42 DAFBe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared to unthinned trees and trees thinned at 42 DAFB, partial flower thinning increased the subsequent development of flower buds per shoot and the number of flower buds per node”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 646–828 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Partial thinning raised flower buds per node.

Treatment
partial flower thinninge0
Outcome
number of flower buds per nodee0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
unthinned trees and trees thinned at 42 DAFBe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared to unthinned trees and trees thinned at 42 DAFB, partial flower thinning increased the subsequent development of flower buds per shoot and the number of flower buds per node”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 646–828 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bud number on proximal nodes increased on medium shoots but not short shoots.

Treatment
Partial Flower Thinningt0
Outcome
Number of flower buds on the proximal five nodese0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
shoots 15.0-30.0 cm in lengthe0
Comparator
shoots 5.0-7.0 cm in lengthe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Number of flower buds on the proximal five nodes of shoots 15.0-30.0 cm in length was increased, although not on shoots 5.0-7.0 cm in length”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 830–970 · show in text ↑
t0

“Partial Flower Thinning Increases Shoot Growth, Fruit Size, and Subsequent Flower Formation of Peach”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Airblast AMADS achieved thinning similar to hand flower thinning.

Treatment
airblast spray application of AMADSe0
Outcome
level of thinninge0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
partial flower thinning by hande0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“airblast spray application of AMADS was effective in achieving a similar level of thinning as that accomplished by partial flower thinning by hand”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1007–1153 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flower removal increased linearly with chemical concentration.

Treatment
chemical concentratione0
Outcome
degree of flower removale0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The degree of flower removal exhibited a linear response to chemical concentration”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1179–1261 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chemical flower thinning produced greater fruit diameter at adjustment than later hand thinning.

Treatment
chemically flower-thinned treese0
Outcome
Fruit diametere0
Direction
greatere0
Comparator
trees thinned by hand at 42 DAFB onlye0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fruit diameter on chemically flower-thinned trees was greater at adjustment thinning time, when compared to trees thinned by hand at 42 DAFB only”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1263–1408 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Partial flower thinning increased the share of fruit above 65 mm at harvest.

Treatment
partial flower thinninge0
Outcome
percentage of fruit >65.0 mme0
Direction
largere0
Comparator
trees thinned at 42 DAFB onlye0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Distribution of fruit at harvest indicated a larger percentage of fruit >65.0 mm in trees which received partial flower thinning in comparison to trees thinned at 42 DAFB only”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1410–1585 · show in text ↑
t0

“peach”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 95–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Partial flower thinning increased crop value.

Treatment
Partial Flower Thinningt0
Outcome
overall crop valuee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“As a result, overall crop value was increased, based on the commercial processing peach price structure at the time of harvest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1587–1713 · show in text ↑
t0

“Partial Flower Thinning Increases Shoot Growth, Fruit Size, and Subsequent Flower Formation of Peach”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–100 · show in text ↑

pruning · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Results differ

64 papers: 42 positive, 22 negative or no effect

41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

60 papers more in this group

See all 64 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.